The USA Leaders
June 25, 2025
Washington D.C. – When Donald Trump returned to the White House in February 2025, one of his first acts was to slam the brakes on what he called “wasteful climate spending.” But now, just a few months into his second term, that decision is coming back to haunt him. A federal judge has ordered the immediate release of EV Charger Funds worth $5 billion—dealing a sharp legal blow to his administration’s efforts to stall green infrastructure initiatives.
The ruling revives funding for electric vehicle (EV) charging networks across 14 states and underscores the limits of executive power when it comes to overriding congressionally approved programs. It’s not just a legal defeat—it’s a potential turning point in the national battle over climate, energy, and the role of federal authority.
Judge Slams the Brakes on Trump’s Funding Freeze
The Trump administration had attempted to suspend the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program, arguing the need for new administrative review. This halted billions in EV charger funding across 16 states and the District of Columbia—funds that had already been authorized under the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
But on June 24, U.S. District Judge Tana Lin ruled the freeze unconstitutional, asserting that the executive branch cannot override the will of Congress.
“When the Executive Branch treads upon the will of the Legislative Branch… it is the Court’s responsibility to restore the balance of power,” Lin wrote in her decision, granting a preliminary injunction in favor of 14 states.
For the Trump administration, the ruling is not just a legal loss—it’s a political embarrassment in the early innings of a presidency trying to rapidly dismantle Biden-era green initiatives.
14 States Get Green Light—Others Still in Limbo
The court’s order applies to 14 states that had proven they were harmed by the funding freeze. These include:
California, New York, Arizona, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Colorado, New Mexico, and Delaware.
Some states—like Nevada, which had $38 million tied up, and New York, with $120 million frozen—can now restart critical charging projects. Meanwhile, Minnesota, Vermont, and the District of Columbia were excluded from the injunction due to insufficient evidence of immediate harm, but legal experts believe they may yet prevail as the case proceeds.
Why It Matters: EV Projects Back on the Road
This ruling reignites a multi-billion-dollar effort to blanket U.S. highways with electric vehicle charging stations. The implications stretch far beyond state borders:
- Projects resume: Construction halted midstream will now move forward, restoring lost jobs and timelines.
- Consumer confidence grows: More chargers mean fewer worries about range—likely boosting EV adoption.
- Contractors mobilize: Supply chains for charging hardware and software are back online.
- Auto industry breathes easier: Automakers like Ford, GM, and Tesla, all banking on strong EV sales, welcome the support infrastructure they need to grow.
For every EV owner waiting in line at the few local charging stations—or potential buyers holding back due to infrastructure doubts—this decision hits close to home.
Market Impact: A Jolt for EV Stocks?
The ruling is being seen as a green light for investors betting on America’s EV future.
Here’s how the market is responding:
- EV charger companies (like ChargePoint, Blink, and EVgo) saw their stocks tick upward in after-hours trading.
- Automakers with strong EV lineups (Tesla, Rivian, Ford, GM) are expected to benefit from increased consumer confidence in the EV ecosystem.
- Battery and infrastructure suppliers may see renewed momentum as states place new orders for equipment and services.
Analysts believe this decision could ease investor worries about regulatory instability, one of the key risks holding back capital in the clean energy sector.
“This restores predictability,” said a New York-based climate investor. “When courts defend Congressional funding, markets breathe easier.”
A Broader Legal Message: Executive Power Has Limits
This isn’t just about EV charger funds it’s about the U.S. Constitution.
The lawsuit, brought by 16 state attorneys general, argued that Trump’s administration violated the separation of powers by withholding funds already approved by Congress. Judge Lin agreed.
The case adds to a growing list of challenges to presidential authority over environmental and infrastructure spending, especially in a post-Chevron legal landscape where courts—not agencies—have the final say in interpreting the law.
“No president gets to erase laws they don’t like,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta. “This isn’t a monarchy. It’s a democracy.”
What’s Next: A Political and Legal Tug-of-War?
The Trump administration has until July 2, 2025 to appeal. If it does, the ruling could land before a higher court—and potentially the Supreme Court—delaying fund distribution again.
But the broader momentum seems clear: Courts are less inclined to tolerate sweeping executive actions that sideline congressional intent, especially when infrastructure, jobs, and climate outcomes hang in the balance.
Future clean energy programs—from solar subsidies to grid resilience funds—may now be more legally protected against abrupt reversals.
Bottom Line: A Win for EV Infrastructure and Legal Accountability
This court ruling of EV charger funds may be the first major speed bump for the Trump administration’s second-term environmental agenda—and a decisive victory for states trying to build the future of clean transportation.
For consumers, it brings the promise of more charging stations, fewer delays, and a faster path to zero-emission travel.
For the White House, it’s a reminder: tearing down climate policy won’t be as easy as signing an executive order.
Also Read: Omnicom Interpublic Merger Deal of $13.5 Billion Approved by FTC With T&C?
